Functionalist, Marxist, Feminist and Interactionism for Each Module Flashcards
ONESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Functionalist Perspective on Family (Views)
Family is a functional prerequisite necessary for social order (Durkheim).
It socializes individuals into value consensus — teaching norms, roles, and expectations (Parsons).
Family contributes to mechanical and organic solidarity in society (Durkheim).
Through primary socialization, families integrate individuals into society (Parsons AGIL Model — L = Latency: preserving culture).
Provides emotional support, economic cooperation, and social placement — ensuring societal stability (Murdock).
Critiques of Functionalist Perspective on Family
Utopian: ignores conflicts and dysfunction within families (abuse, inequality).
Assumes all families are stable and functional, disregarding dysfunctional or broken families.
Overly deterministic — underestimates human agency (individual free will).
Ignores gender inequalities (Feminist critique).
Focuses on consensus, overlooking power dynamics and oppression (Marxist critique).
Functionalist Perspective on Culture (Views)
Culture is a ‘glue’ that maintains order and stability (Durkheim).
Shared norms and values create value consensus necessary to avoid anomie (chaos).
Cultural universals (like family, funeral rites, jokes) exist in every society (Murdock).
Culture is a functional prerequisite that ensures social integration (Parsons).
Culture adapts and evolves to maintain societal equilibrium (Parsons AGIL Model - Adaptation and Integration).
Critiques of Functionalist Perspective on Culture
Overemphasizes stability and ignores social conflict and cultural diversity.
Ignores how some cultures dominate others (Marxist critique).
Assumes cultural universals are positive — but may actually oppress minority groups.
Underestimates cultural change and resistance.
Neglects how power inequalities shape culture (Conflict theory criticism).
Functionalist Perspective on Education (Views)
Education socializes individuals into society’s norms and values (Parsons).
Schools promote value consensus and social solidarity.
Education selects and allocates individuals for future roles (meritocracy).
Functions to integrate diverse individuals into a stable society (Durkheim — moral education).
Acts as an agent for latent and manifest functions (Robert K. Merton).
Critiques of Functionalist Perspective on Education
Overlooks how education reproduces social inequalities (Marxist critique).
Assumes education is always meritocratic — ignores discrimination by class, race, gender.
Utopian view: ignores conflict and resistance in schools.
Assumes value consensus where value conflict often exists.
Ignores how education may serve capitalist interests (Marxist Althusser: Ideological State Apparatus).
Functionalist Perspective on Religion (Views)
Religion maintains social solidarity and collective consciousness (Durkheim — The Elementary Forms of Religious Life).
Provides moral guidelines and shared beliefs that bond society.
Reinforces value consensus through rituals and beliefs.
Functions to reduce anomie by providing meaning and purpose.
Religious ceremonies act as social glue in traditional and modern societies.
Critiques of Functionalist Perspective on Religion
Overlooks religion’s role in oppression and conflict (e.g., religious wars).
Assumes religion is always positive and cohesive.
Ignores secularization — society is becoming less religious.
Fails to explain religious diversity and conflict within societies.
Marxists argue religion reinforces false class consciousness (Marx: “opium of the people”).
Functionalist Perspective on Stratification and Mobility (Views)
Stratification is functional and ensures role allocation (Davis and Moore thesis).
Rewards (wealth, prestige) motivate people to work hard and fill important roles.
Inequality is necessary for society’s stability and operation.
Social mobility is seen as possible through meritocracy.
Stratification is linked to functional prerequisites — it ensures society’s best talent is used efficiently.
Critiques of Functionalist Perspective on Stratification and Mobility
Marxists argue stratification benefits only the elite, not society as a whole.
Social mobility is often limited by class, gender, race (not meritocratic).
Underplays the negative effects of inequality (poverty, discrimination).
Assumes that all roles that are highly rewarded are the most important (e.g., celebrities vs nurses).
Fails to explain persistent poverty and social exclusion despite societal needs.
Critiques of Marxist Perspective on Education
Overemphasizes determinism — not all students passively accept indoctrination (Paul Willis, Learning to Labour).
Ignores role of students’ agency and resistance in schools.
Fails to consider gender and ethnicity as sources of inequality.
Some working-class individuals achieve upward mobility — challenges the deterministic view.
Functionalists argue education promotes value consensus and social integration (Durkheim, Parsons).
Marxist Perspective on Education (Views)
Bowles and Gintis: Education reproduces capitalist workforce through the hidden curriculum (1976).
Correspondence principle: school mirrors the workplace — hierarchy, obedience, alienation.
Hidden curriculum teaches submission to authority and acceptance of inequality.
Credentialism ensures the ruling class monopolizes high-status jobs (Althusser: Ideological State Apparatus).
Students are socialized into false class consciousness — believing success is purely meritocratic.
Marxist Perspective on Family (Views)
Friedrich Engels: Family arose to solve the problem of inheritance of private property (The Origin of the Family).
Family socializes children into accepting capitalist ideology (false class consciousness).
Family acts as a unit of consumption, helping capitalism thrive (buying goods, producing future workers).
Reproduces class inequality across generations — property, wealth, norms transmitted.
Family reflects the bourgeoisie’s interests by instilling obedience and discipline needed for the workplace.
Critiques of Marxist Perspective on Family
Ignores emotional and supportive aspects of family (Functionalist critique — Murdock, Parsons).
Assumes all families serve capitalism — overlooks family diversity.
Too economically deterministic — downplays individual agency (Interactionist critique — Mead).
Neglects gender oppression inside the family (Feminist critique — Delphy and Leonard).
Postmodernists argue family structures have changed too much for Marxist views to remain fully accurate.
Marxist Perspective on Culture (Views)
Karl Marx: Culture serves as a tool to maintain ruling class dominance (cited by Macionis).
Dominant ideology — the culture of the ruling class is presented as “universal values.”
False class consciousness spread via cultural institutions (media, education, religion).
Lower-class cultures suppressed and labelled inferior (working-class cultures marginalized).
Culture helps win consent to inequality (Macionis: culture promotes acceptance of existing order).
Critiques of Marxist Perspective on Culture
Neglects cultural resistance and counter-cultures.
Too much focus on economic base — ignores other sources of culture like ethnicity, gender.
Assumes cultural hegemony is total — fails to explain cultural diversity.
Functionalists argue culture integrates society by maintaining social order (Durkheim).
Interactionists argue individuals actively interpret culture (Mead, Cooley).
Marxist Perspective on Religion (Views)
Karl Marx: Religion is the “opium of the people” — dulls the pain of exploitation.
Religion legitimizes social inequality — suffering seen as natural or divinely ordained.
Religion spreads false class consciousness — encouraging passive acceptance.
Religious institutions serve the ruling class by reinforcing obedience and discipline.
Religion is part of the superstructure shaped by the economic base (capitalism).
Critiques of Marxist Perspective on Religion
Fails to explain religions that promote social change (e.g., Liberation Theology in Latin America).
Assumes religion is always conservative — overlooks radical religious movements.
Ignores personal meanings and emotional needs fulfilled by religion (Interactionist critique).
Overlooks the decline of religion in secular societies.
Functionalists argue religion builds social solidarity rather than only promoting oppression (Durkheim).
Marxist Perspective on Stratification and Mobility (Views)
Stratification is rooted in capitalist exploitation.
Bourgeoisie own the means of production and dominate the proletariat.
Mobility is rare because the structure maintains inequality.
Institutions like education, media, and religion reinforce class divisions.
Only a revolution will abolish class structures and lead to a classless society (Communism).
Critiques of Marxist Perspective on Stratification and Mobility
Underestimates the extent of social mobility in modern societies.
Ignores middle class growth and complexity of class structures.
Sees economic factors as overly determining social relations.
Some inequalities exist for functional reasons (Functionalist critique — Davis & Moore).
Revolution rarely occurs in capitalist societies — false class consciousness persists.
Interactionist Perspective on Family (Views)
George Herbert Mead: Family socializes the child through symbolic interaction (Play and Game stages).
Charles Cooley: Family is critical in developing the Looking Glass Self — we see ourselves through others’ eyes.
Families are arenas for negotiating meanings of roles (not passive acceptance).
Emphasizes the importance of daily interactions (gestures, communication) in building family bonds.
Family experiences are subjective — each individual may interpret family dynamics differently.
Critiques of Interactionist Perspective on Family
Ignores power structures and economic inequalities (Marxist critique).
Downplays gendered power dynamics within families (Feminist critique).
Too focused on small-scale interactions — neglects wider social forces.
Overemphasizes individual agency — society and institutions also shape families (Functionalist critique).
Difficult to generalize findings — emphasizes subjectivity over large patterns.
Interactionist Perspective on Culture (Views)
Culture is produced and maintained through daily interactions and symbolic communication (Mead).
Shared meanings emerge from group interactions, not imposed by dominant class.
Symbols (language, gestures) form the basis of culture (Cooley, Mead).
Culture is constantly changing as people negotiate meanings.
Individuals are active agents in creating, modifying, and interpreting culture.
Critiques of Interactionist Perspective on Culture
Ignores power and economic forces that shape culture (Marxist critique).
Overemphasizes individual agency — not all cultural meanings are freely negotiated.
Fails to explain structural inequalities embedded in culture.
Neglects the impact of mass media and globalization.
Difficult to measure subjective interpretations objectively.
Interactionist Perspective on Education (Views)
Focuses on teacher-student interactions and labelling (Becker: labelling theory).
Self-fulfilling prophecy — students labelled “smart” perform better; “slow” perform worse.
Negotiation of meaning — students actively interpret and respond to school experiences (Hargreaves).
Schools are sites of impression management (Goffman’s dramaturgical model).
Educational success and failure are socially constructed through everyday interactions.
Critiques of Interactionist Perspective on Education
Ignores structural inequalities (social class, gender, ethnicity).
Overlooks the economic function of education (Marxist critique — Bowles and Gintis).
Too focused on micro-level phenomena — neglects the wider macro social forces.
Fails to explain systematic patterns of educational inequality.
Interactionists describe but rarely explain why broader inequalities persist.
Interactionist Perspective on Religion (Views)
Religion is a social construction arising from everyday interaction (Mead).
Religious meanings are created, modified, and maintained through symbolic communication.
Rituals and ceremonies help create shared religious meanings.
Emphasizes subjective experiences of the sacred and the profane.
Different individuals or groups may interpret the same religious symbol in different ways.
Critiques of Interactionist Perspective on Religion
Fails to address religion’s role in maintaining inequality (Marxist critique).
Neglects religious institutions’ power structures.
Focuses too much on individual experiences, ignoring organized religion’s societal role.
Cannot fully explain religious conflict or large-scale phenomena like secularization.
Overemphasizes symbolic meanings without analyzing material conditions.
Interactionist Perspective on Stratification and Mobility (Views)
Stratification is constructed and maintained through interpersonal interactions.
Social status is assigned based on interpretations of appearance, speech, mannerisms (Goffman: impression management).
Mobility depends on how individuals manage impressions and navigate social symbols.
Labelling theory explains how lower-class individuals may be stigmatized.
Stratification is not fixed — meanings and boundaries are socially negotiated.
Critiques of Interactionist Perspective on Stratification and Mobility
Ignores economic structures that limit mobility (Marxist critique).
Overemphasizes individual agency — neglects how rigid class systems can be.
Hard to generalize findings — based on subjective interpretations.
Fails to explain persistent large-scale inequalities.
Stratification is not just about perceptions — it’s linked to real material resources.
Feminist Perspective on Family (Views)
Delphy and Leonard: Family is a patriarchal institution where women’s labour is exploited.
Ann Oakley: Canalization and manipulation — family socializes children into traditional gender roles.
Margaret Benston: Family maintains capitalism by producing future workers unpaid (domestic labour).
The family is a site where patriarchal ideology is transmitted and reinforced.
Different branches: Radical feminists (family oppresses women directly), Marxist feminists (family oppresses to serve capitalism), Liberal feminists (inequality is gradually improving).
Critiques of Feminist Perspective on Family
Ignores positive aspects of family life (emotional support, love).
Overgeneralizes — not all women are equally oppressed (race, class differences — Intersectionality: Kimberlé Crenshaw).
Radical feminists sometimes neglect men’s changing roles (e.g., stay-at-home fathers).
Postmodernists argue family forms are now diverse and fluid.
Functionalists argue family benefits society and individuals (Parsons).
Feminist Perspective on Culture (Views)
Culture is male-dominated (androcentric) — promotes male values and suppresses women’s voices (Simone de Beauvoir: The Second Sex).
Media, language, religion reinforce patriarchal norms.
Cultural products often objectify women (Laura Mulvey: male gaze in media).
Hegemonic masculinity is normalized, while femininity is marginalized (Connell).
Feminist scholars highlight the gendered nature of cultural symbols and practices.
Critiques of Feminist Perspective on Culture
Sometimes overemphasizes male domination — ignores female agency.
Intersectional critics argue early feminism ignored race, class, sexuality (bell hooks).
Some cultural changes promote women’s empowerment (e.g., feminist art, literature).
Marxists argue economic class, not gender, is the main cause of inequality.
Not all men benefit equally from the patriarchal culture (working-class men may also be marginalized).
Feminist Perspective on Education (Views)
Schools reproduce gender inequalities — boys encouraged into sciences, girls into caring professions (Spender).
Hidden curriculum reinforces gender stereotypes.
Curriculum content often focuses on male achievements (history, science).
Teachers may have lower expectations for girls in traditional male subjects.
Liberal feminists highlight progress (more women in universities), but radical feminists argue patriarchy persists.
Critiques of Feminist Perspective on Education
Ignores improvements in girls’ achievements (girls now outperform boys in many regions).
Overlooks other sources of inequality like class and ethnicity.
Some boys also underachieve — educational issues not solely gendered.
Functionalists argue education promotes meritocracy.
Postmodernists argue education is becoming more individualized — not strictly gendered.
Feminist Perspective on Religion (Views)
Religion is a patriarchal institution that reinforces male dominance (Simone de Beauvoir).
Religious doctrines often portray women as subordinate (e.g., Eve’s role in Christianity).
Men occupy higher positions in most religious organizations (priests, imams).
Religious texts and rituals often exclude or marginalize women.
Some feminist theologians argue for reinterpreting religious texts to highlight women’s agency (e.g., Mary Daly).
Critiques of Feminist Perspective on Religion
Some religions empower women (e.g., female deities in Hinduism).
Ignores women’s active role in religious life and leadership (e.g., nuns, female pastors).
Postmodernists argue religious interpretations are fluid and varied.
Functionalists argue religion promotes social cohesion, not just patriarchy.
Some feminist scholars (e.g., Nawal El Saadawi) argue interpretation of religion is patriarchal, not the religion itself.
Feminist Perspective on Stratification and Mobility (Views)
Gender is a major factor in stratification — women experience the glass ceiling (invisible barriers).
Women are often concentrated in low-status, low-paid jobs (dual labour market theory).
Patriarchal structures limit women’s mobility (Delphy and Leonard).
Horizontal and vertical mobility is more restricted for women.
Intersectionality shows how race, class, and gender compound inequality (Crenshaw).
Critiques of Feminist Perspective on Stratification and Mobility
Fails to account for men’s disadvantages in some sectors (e.g., education, certain jobs).
Liberal feminists argue legal reforms have improved mobility opportunities for women.
Not all women experience oppression equally — intersectionality needed.
Functionalists argue roles are based on merit and ability, not purely gender.
Changes in society (equal opportunity laws, affirmative action) challenge older feminist claims.
